Monetary help can ge given for "Lost Liberty Hotel" Proposed on Justice Souter's Land

[Desertdog]

The Supreme Court ruled that city governments should be allowed to take private property from one person and give it to a developer. So we decided that 34 Cilley Hill Road in Weare, New Hampshire would be a nice place to build The Lost Liberty Hotel. Why is this location essential? It is the home of David Souter, one of the Justices that voted in favor of this decision.

Would you like to help us? Go to;
http://www.freestarmedia.com/

 

[dasmi]

Sorry, as sweet and the justice would be for this to happen to him, I can't support it. It's wrong to take anyone's land, period.

 

[Reno]

There's nothing wrong with taking property from someone who gave the OK to take someone else's.

 

[Ky Larry]

dasmi, I understand you position. I agree that it is morally wrong to take a persons private property and give it to another person or group to increase tax revenue. However, I feel that a message needs to be sent to SCJ Souter and his inner beltway pals. They need to be reminded that they are not above the rest of us and that the rules apply to them ,too.

 

[stevelyn]

I think I can sacrifice the price of an unissued Yugo SKS in the name of Liberty and property rights.

The Second American Revolution has to start somewhere and taking a black-robed, jacka$$ tyrant's land using the legal system is about as good a place to start as any.

Turnabout, is afterall fair-play.

 

[TheOtherOne]

They need to be reminded that they are not above the rest of us and that the rules apply to them ,too.

If only that was actually true.

 

[jnojr]

Sorry, as sweet and the justice would be for this to happen to him, I can't support it. It's wrong to take anyone's land, period.

The person who ownes this land has specifically said that seizing land for private development is OK. There is no moral conundrum here... he can either suck it up, or admit that what he really meant was that it's OK to take our land, not his.